1. Chap. 12 Benefits of Natural Landscape - a study (I) 張俊彥 Chun-Yen Chang 國立臺灣大學園藝學系教授 國立臺灣大學園藝暨景觀學系 【園藝療法 】 【本著作除另有註明外，採取創用 CC 「姓名標示 －非商業性－相同方式分享」台灣 3.0 版授權釋出】創用 CC 「姓名標示 －非商業性－相同方式分享」台灣 3.0 版 1

2. Introduction Landscape vs. Wildlife distribution Landscape vs. Human reactions Landscape on both wildlife and humankind?

7. Study Area Twelve sites along the boundary of the Yangmingshan National Park, Taipei, Taiwan Twelve sites along the Appalachian Trail in the Pennsylvania, USA

8. Study Area Testing sites were categorized according to their development level. –Type A: Community or buildings around, with some traffic on the paved roads. –Type B: Scattered houses, few traffic on the paved roads. –Type C: Very few house, only unpaved roads. –Type D: No building around, only trail access

9. Type A Sites YMS, Taiwan

10. Type B Sites YMS, Taiwan

11. Type C Sites YMS, Taiwan

12. Type D Sites YMS, Taiwan

13. Type A Sites AT, USA

14. Type B Sites AT, USA

15. Type C Sites AT, USA

16. Type D Sites AT, USA

17. Research Design GPS positioning Aero photography map –Landscape ecological indices Staking –Bird investigation Taking videos –Natural perception –Psychophysiological responses

18. Landscape ecology indices Different hierarchy, circular with radius of 30m, 50m, 100m were analyzed to calculate their landscape indices in YMS, Taiwan. 100m, 500m, 1000m were analyzed to calculate their landscape indices in AT, USA. FragStats for ArcView ver. 2.0

19. Bird investigation Point Count Method Investigation –February to October, 2003 –20 minutes per site each time –Twice per month for each site –Weekdays

20. Natural perception Collect the “Natural” statements from the natural related magazines to establish the first stage of the “Natural Perception Scale”. Twenty most frequently mentioned vocabulary were selected. The scale items were interviewed at three largest train stations (Taipei, Taichung, and KauHsung city) in Taiwan to general people about their perception of natural (n=156).

21. Natural perception The scale’s Cronbach’s alpha = 0.96 shows the reliability of the scale. Factor analysis was used to reduce the number of the questioning items. It shows three dimensions of the scale, the fauna, the flora, and the environment statements.

22. Natural Perception Scale 1. This place grows with large trees and all kinds of plants. 2. This place has unique flowers or has wild flowers all over it. 3. This place is widely planted with verdant grass. 4. This place has diversified flora and integrated forest. 5. This place has small mammals, such as squirrel and rabbit. 6. This place has a big group of birds in term of the same or different species. 7. This place has insects, such as butterfly, bee, and firefly. 8. This place has very diversified species. 9. This place is often veiled with cloud and mist. 10. This place has specious blue sky. 11. This place has beautiful sunrise. 12. This place has beautiful sunset.

23. Attention Restoration Scores PRS Scale: –Adopt Laumann’s PRS scale (2001), which includes 5 features and 22 items. According to Laumann’s study, two of the questions with the highest PRS score in each feature category are chosen. –Preferences –Relaxation

24. Natural Perception and Attention Restoration Scores

25. Biofeedback responses Biofeedback instrument was used to record respondents’ physical responses. Physical Responses –Alpha Brain wave, Electroencephalography (EEG) –Muscle Tension, Electromyography (EMG) –Heart Rate (HR)

26. Biofeedback responses Instrument –The Procomp+/Biograph V2.0 biofeedback System by Thought Technology Ltd.

27. Electroencephalography ( EEG) EEG-a: left hemisphere –Tested at left ear (position number Fp1-F3-A1), recording the α waves. EEG-b: right hemisphere –tested at right ear (position number Fp2-F4-A2), recording the α waves. Active Base Active Base

28. Electromyography (EMG) Facial muscles on the forehead can better reflect mental and emotional tension or stress. Source 1 Source 2 Reference

29. Heart Rate (HR) The infrared detector detects was placed at the tip of the respondent’s middle finger.

30. Testing Procedure Pre-testing interpretation: –The purpose of the procedures is to allow participants to feel relaxed without unpredictable nervousness. Start testing: –Participants were first required to frown and EMG was recorded at this time. –In between pictures a blue blank slide was shown to decrease the influence of last picture.

31. Testing Procedure First participants were asked to spend 20 seconds and imagine how they would feel in the landscape shown on the video. The same steps were repeated until all 24 videos (2 videos for each site) were tested. To prevent the residual effects of the former picture on the following picture, a preview of all pictures was shown before the test, while five sets of landscapes were played randomly during the experiment.

33. 129 students participated in Taiwan, including 73 females (56.6%) and 56 males (43.4%) 72 students participated in the US, including 34 females (47.2%) and 38 males (52.8%) Z-value was used to standardize respondent’s physical data.

34. H1: There are relationships between landscape ecology indices and bird species indices. Spearman Rank Order Correlation Coefficient

35. YMSRichnessDiversityEvennessCapita m50010030500100305001003050010030 Farm AREA 0.67* NP 0.61* MPS 0.67* MSI 0.61* MPFD PD AWMSI 0.62* Build AREA NP MPS MSI MPFD PD AWMSI *sig. at.05 level, **sig. At.01 level

36. YMSRichnessDiversityEvennessCapita m50010030500100305001003050010030 Woods AREA -0.63* NP MPS -0.61* MSI 0.76** MPFD 0.59* PD 0.61* AWMSI Water AREA NP MPS MSI MPFD 0.60* PD AWMSI *sig. at.05 level, **sig. At.01 level

37. ATRichnessDiversityEvennessCapita m1000500100100050010010005001001000500100 Farm AREA 0.65*0.76** NP 0.80**0.58*0.72** MPS 0.68*0.76** MSI 0.84**0.60* 0.73**0.72** MPFD 0.82**0.68* PD 0.77**0.64* AWMSI 0.81**0.61*0.77**0.69* Build AREA NP MPS MSI MPFD 0.60*0.66* PD 0.64*0.63* AWMSI *sig. at.05 level, **sig. At.01 level

38. ATRichnessDiversityEvennessCapita m1000500100100050010010005001001000500100 Woods AREA -0.61*-0.68*-0.78** NP MPS -0.59*-0.68*-0.74** MSI MPFD -0.78**-0.71** PD 0.59* 0.68* 0.74** AWMSI 0.73** Water AREA NP MPS MSI MPFD PD AWMSI *sig. at.05 level, **sig. At.01 level

39. Farm Woods Vegetation Cover Food Supply habitats 30-100m radius in YMS, Taiwan 100-1000 radius in AT, USA

40. H2: There are differences among different landscape areas in regard to people’s natural perception. Repeated Measure ANOVA

41. The Repeat-Measure ANOVA of landscape types to natural perception in YMS. SourceType III SSdfFSig. Natural Perception 20204.9522.713178.3820.000 Natural Perception – Fauna Dimension 3103.3412.641176.3370.000 Natural Perception – Flora Dimension 3024.1612.726154.3380.000 Natural Perception – Environment Dimension 1238.6512.72062.6710.000

42. The Repeat-Measure ANOVA of landscape types to natural perception in AT. SourceType III SSdfFSig. Natural Perception 2253.2503.00014.8930.000 Natural Perception – Fauna Dimension 305.9273.00011.6730.000 Natural Perception – Flora Dimension 467.1772.69321.9360.000 Natural Perception – Environment Dimension 509.8062.68220.2300.000

43. Respondents have significant different natural perceptions among different landscape types. –Total natural perception –Fauna perception –Flora perception –Environment perception –YMS, Taiwan –AT, USA

44. H3: There are relationships between people’s natural perception and their psychophysiology responses. Pearson Correlation Coefficient

45. The Pearson correlation coefficient between natural perception and respondents’ psychophysiological responses in YMS SourceEEG-aEEG-bEMGHRPRS Flora 0.08 0.02-0.18*0.080.72** Fauna 0.07 0.06-0.110.030.57** Environment-0.01-0.05-0.110.030.61**

46. SourceEEG-aEEG-bEMGHRPRS Flora0.05-0.13-0.080.090.44** Fauna0.01-0.13-0.100.090.34** Environment-0.07-0.09-0.15-0.110.39** The Pearson correlation coefficient between natural perception and respondents’ psychophysiological responses in AT

47. YMS vs. AT Natural Perception –Flora Psychophysiology Responses –EMG (YMS) –PRS (YMS and AT)

48. H4: There are relationships between landscape ecology indices and psychophysiology responses Pearson Correlation Coefficient

51. YMS, Taiwan, 100m Woods –Attention restoration (PRS) –Muscle tension (EMG) –Right brain alpha wave (EEG-b) AT, USA, 500m Farm –Right brain alpha wave (EEG-b) –Attention restoration (PRS) –Heart Rate (HR) –Muscle tension (EMG)

52. Questions Human and wildlife will be influenced by the landscape structures. But how to define a “better” landscape for “both” side?

53. Structure Function Change Sustainable Landscape Landscape Structures that related to both humankind and wildlife Landscape structures that influence wildlife Landscape structures that influence human’s perception

54. Landscape Ecological Indices Psychophysiological Responses H1 H2 Wildlife Ecological Indices indices Influence both side

55. 12 study sites in the Lion's Head Mountain Scenery Area, Taiwan

56. 1/5000, 0.5m*0.5m, 500m radius

57. Farm Water Woods Build 50m250m 500m

58. Wildlife A1, 綠繡眼 (Japanese White-eye, Zosterops japonca ) A2, 白頭翁 (Chinese Bulbul, Pycnonotus sinensis ) A3, 小雨燕 (House Swift, Apus affinis ) B1, 白頭翁 (Chinese Bulbul, Pycnonotus sinensis ) B2, 紅嘴黑鵯 (Black Bulbul, Hypsipetes madagascariensis ) B3, 斑文鳥 (Nutmeg Mannikin, Lonchura punctulata ) C1, 白頭翁 (Chinese Bulbul, Pycnonotus sinensis ) C2, 白頭翁 (Chinese Bulbul, Pycnonotus sinensis ) C3, 繡眼畫眉 (Grey-eyed Nun Babbler, Alcippe morrisonia ) D1, 繡眼畫眉 (Grey-eyed Nun Babbler, Alcippe morrisonia ) D2, 綠繡眼 (Japanese White-eye, Zosterops japonca ) D3, 紅嘴黑鵯 (Black Bulbul, Hypsipetes madagascariensis )

59. Problem 1 Human’s eyes vs. Birds’ view Different altitudes, different resolution, different color, different attractions… Use both circular and visible area

60. Problem 2 Stimulus images Photo, slide, video, different shoot angle, Simulated images, virtual reality, verbal description… 360 degree circular video

61. 10 ° Circular Area Visible Area

62. Testing Media Preparation 360 Degree circular motor DV video on a tripod, horizontally

63. Bird Investigations March – December, 2004 Weekdays, every 2 weeks Point Count Method, 10 minutes Species, Number, Behavior, Habitats

64. March, 15, 2004 – March, 26, 2004 25 degree centigrade

65. Interpretation the testing procedure Video playing, 60 seconds per circle, recording the biofeedback responses For further qualitative discussions, 3 structured questions were asked: 1.Please speak out what you see, hear and feel? 2.Please speak out what would you do in this setting? 3.Please speak out how much you prefer this setting, why? Testing Procedure

66. Convenient Sampling 22 students participated in Chung Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan. Z-value was used to standardize respondent’s physical data.

67. Statistical analysis Spearman rank order correlation coefficient Landscape Ecological Indices Psychophysiological Responses H1 H2 Wildlife Ecological Indices

69. Pearson correlation coefficient Landscape Ecological Indices Psychophysiological Responses H1 H2 Wildlife Ecological Indices

72. 10 °

76. Conclusions

77. People - Natural Relationship Some landscape structure indices influence both wildlife species and humankind. –250/Farm, MPS, Evenness, PRS –250/Farm, MPFD, Evenness, EEG-a, EEG-b, PRS –500/Woods, PD, Capita, PRS

80. Bald Eagle State Park, PA, USA

83. AREA MSI (Mean Shape Index) PD (Patch Density)

84. MPS (Mean Patch Size) NP (Number of Patches)

85. Increase variables, increase result variety … –Landscapes structure indices… –Wildlife richness, diversity, evenness, capita… –EEG, EMG, HR… Sustainable Landscape –Should landscape benefits both humankind and wildlife on all aspects? –How to define a “good” influence?

86. Thank You cycmail@ntu.edu.tw

87. 合理使用 公共財 非專屬授權 Wiki 公共財 GNU 版權標章 姓名標示 - 非商業性 - 相同方式分享 姓名標示 - 非商業性 - 禁止改作 姓名標示 - 相同方式分享 姓名標示 - 禁止改作 姓名標示 - 非商業性 姓名標示 87

88. 版權聲明 頁碼作品版權圖示來源 / 作者 3 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 4 5 6 9 88

89. 版權聲明 頁碼作品版權圖示來源 / 作者 10 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 11 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 12 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 13 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 14 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 89

90. 版權聲明 頁碼作品版權圖示來源 / 作者 15 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 16 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 17 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 24 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 26 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 90

91. 版權聲明 頁碼作品版權圖示來源 / 作者 27 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 28 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 29 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 29 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 32 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 91

92. 版權聲明 頁碼作品版權圖示來源 / 作者 49 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 50 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 51 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 55 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 56 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 92

93. 版權聲明 頁碼作品版權圖示來源 / 作者 57 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 61 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 62 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 62 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 64 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 93

94. 版權聲明 頁碼作品版權圖示來源 / 作者 65 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 68 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 70 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 71 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 72 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 10 ° 94

95. 版權聲明 頁碼作品版權圖示來源 / 作者 73 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 74 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 75 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 78 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 79 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 95

96. 版權聲明 頁碼作品版權圖示來源 / 作者 80 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 81 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 82 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 83 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 84 臺灣大學 / 張俊彥 96